Is it time for Nancy Pelosi to resign?

Kevin:
I will now quote Jerry Mcguire:
"Shut up...just shut up. You had me at 'resign'"

Pelosi resigning would definitely "complete me."

Flustered Pelosi Attempts to Explain What She Knew When Regarding WaterboardingWeb Link


Does anyone understand what she is saying? she could be in big trouble if it turns out she lied to Congress and the CIA looks like they might just let her twist in the wind.
No one seems to be coming to her defense, why?

Sharon,

"No one seems to be coming to her defense, why?"

Karma

I loved the press conference today: "umm uh an aide, umm justice department...uhh...not illegal...and I was told that um well let me just repeat uhh well so I can be well, um uh clear and ahh I wasn't told that well I was told that ummm uh..."

It must be Sharon's dream for Pelosi to resign. Not going to happen.
Interesting how the repubicans are attacking by claiming she knew about the waterboarding but did nothing to stop it. Are they now saying that weatherboarding should have been stopped? Clearly the party of "no" has nothing better to do.
It is unfortunate that posters like Vote Tuesday! cannot be civil.

Not until the TRUTH COMMISSION learns what she, and all Dems on the Committee, knew, and when they knew it, and how they voted and what they wanted MORE of...

And while we are at it, when are we going to have a TRUTH COMMISSION to report on who and what caused the econimic meltdown, and who and what made it worse, and who and what are preventing the recovery?

Dear Party of "NO"> No, those of us you call 'republicans" are disgusted by the HYPOCRISY of the left, and are insisting that if the left wants to redefine torture to include waterboarding, then prosecute those who advised on the law and followed the law, then everyone who participated in creating the policy needs to go down...or none do.

Simple, really. Stop being hypocrites, using American politics to destroy the country and your political enemies in order to win power, and we will stop throwing it back at you.

"Not until the TRUTH COMMISSION learns what she, and all Dems on the Committee, knew, and when they knew it, and how they voted and what they wanted MORE of..."

I didn't realize that the use of torture had been put up for a vote in Congress. I assumed that Cheney, Bush, Rice et al decided on enhanced "interrogation methods" and went ahead. Are you now saying that they would have stopped if Congress would have told them to?

It's clear that the CIA lied about torture, and Pelosi's version is corroborated by former senator Bob Graham. However, if she had been aware at any time of waterboarding and still signed off on it, even as minority leader, she shouldn't just resign-she should be tried with the others for war crimes, albeit as an enabler, not a principal.

"She should resign. " Sure, provided Bush, Cheney, Yoo, et al. have been put in jail first.

Former aide to Condoleezza Rice and former 9/11 Commission Executive Director Philip Zelikow yesterday became the latest to join Jesse Ventura by calling for investigations into torture, telling Laura Rozen: "When there is this kind of collective failure, we need to learn from what happened." Gen. Barry McCaffrey two weeks ago pointed out that numerous detainees were "murdered" in U.S. custody -which is unquestionably true - and called for criminal investigations of the top-level political officials who sanctioned torture. Gen. Antonio Taguba previously stated that "there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account." Colin Powell's former Chief of Staff, retired U.S. Army Col. Larry Wilkerson, this month endorsed both investigations and prosecutions for Bush officials who broke the law. Bush 41 ambassador Thomas Pickering and Reagan-appointed FBI Director William Sessions wrote in The Washington Post that an independent investigation was a pre-requisite to moving beyond the torture era.

If Speaker Pelosi was aware of any of the aforementioned and didn't speak up, she should resign, but first comes first-Bush, Cheney and their underlings must be prosecuted for war crimes, here in the US, facing the death penalty, or in the Hague, then we can worry about what Pelosi knew and when did she know it.

Looks like a Scooter Libby redo, she may be facing jail time.
The question is will Obama pardon her and why is no one of any significance coming to her defense?
"I think she has lied to the House, and I think that the House has an absolute obligation to open an inquiry, and I hope there will be a resolution to investigate her. And I think this is a big deal. I don't think the Speaker of the House can lie to the country on national security matters,” Gingrich said.

He continued: "I think this is the most despicable, dishonest and vicious political effort I've seen in my lifetime."

"She is a trivial politician, viciously using partisanship for the narrowist of purposes, and she dishonors the Congress by her behavior."

"Speaker Pelosi's the big loser, because she either comes across as incompetent, or dishonest.
Those are the only two defenses,” Gingrich said. “The fact is she either didn't do her job, or she did do her job and she's now afraid to tell the truth.”

Listen here Web Link

Sharon must be salivating at this latest news story. Naturally we have her usual hysterical rantings--i.e. jail time.
What is really amusing is that she quotes Newt Gingrich--isn't this the "honorable" member of the house who was having an affair while still married and served his wife her divorce papers while she was in the hospital for cancer surgery?
Also of amusement is that the fact that republicans are all worked up about torture/waterboarding now, when it potentially involves a democrat. They all wanted completely drop the issue when it meant investigating Bush/Cheney/Rice et al and the lawyers that supported the policy. As others have stated let's deal with the people actually behind the practice and then we will get to the others that may or may not have known.
Of course the whole post above is amusing since it comes from someone who claims to be a 9/11 survivor and only posts to inflame passions without any real personal stance on anything

The issue is,in fact, whether Pelosi LIED to Congress.

If she did, that is a serious Federal Crime and the criminal justice system will automatically engage.

This not a partisan or personal matter, if she lied to Congress then she is toast and that is why Boxer et alia are treating her like a leper.
A sad end to a long career in public service.

Sharon continues her hysterical postings, which are not based on fact.
When did Pelosi testify under oath to Congress? When was it proven that she lied?
What is the serious "federal crime" that Sharon is referring to? As usual there is no facts in Sharon's posts.
If we counted up how many Sharon has labelled as "being toast", it would make quite a list. not to mention the fact that non of them have "become toast".
Sharin tries to tell us this is not a partisan or personal matter. Sharon also told us she was a 9/11 survivor and in other threads she has told many other stories.
It is interesting watching Sharon and her fellow republicans all of sudden being concerned about waterboarding/torture.

BTW, Sharon, shouldn't the "issue" be whether we engaged in torture and if so, who authorized it. There has been recent testimony that weatherboarding/torture was not effective. Shouldn't that be the real "issue"??
Not a partisan matter indeed, Sharon.

Former Colin Powell chief of staff Lawrence Wilkerson.
The only person defending Pelosi, is a third-rate conspiracy theorist and a borderline bigot, read this quote Wilkerson gave to Robert Dreyfuss

"A lot of these guys, including [David] Wurmser, I looked at as card-carrying members of the Likud party, as I did with [Douglas] Feith. You wouldn't open their wallet and find a card, but I often wondered if their primary allegiance was to their own country or to Israel. That was the thing that troubled me, because there was so much that they said and did that looked like it was more reflective of Israel's interest than our own."

How does Wilkerson know you wouldn't find a Likud card in their wallets?

With friends like Wilkerson Pelosi is in real trouble.

Meanwhile Pelosis twisting in the wind is front page news in every paper, apart from the NYT of course.

--WashPost lead story, “Accusations Flying In Interrogation Battle: Pelosi Says CIA Misled Congress on Methods”

--WashTimes A1, “Pelosi admits waterboard briefing”

--USA Today, A1 mug-shot tease: “Pelosi: CIA Misled her on torture” ...

--WashPost’s Dan Balz, in an analysis also at top of A1: “Pelosi's performance in the Capitol was either a calculated escalation of a long-running feud with the Bush administration or a reckless act by a politician whose word had been called into question. Perhaps it was both.”

But for some reason, the New York Times decided to bury the story on Page A-18:

--N.Y. Times, A20 (A18 in Washington Edition), “Pelosi Says She Knew of Waterboarding by Early 2003”

Here is the link to the truth about Pelosis only friend,Lawrence Wilkerson.Web Link

Clearly Sharon is cherry picking what she wants to hear from the news.

After attacking Colin Powell, she is attacking another decorated military man, LAwrence Wilkerson, because he dared to criticize the Bush administration.
What is of interest now is that Sharon is using Israel to try to show that Wilkerson is a bigot. This follows numerous threads where Sharon viciously attacked the Israeli FM Lieberman with a series of vile attacks and compared Israel to a dog that needed to be brought to heel. But I guess when you want to try to make a point anything goes from someone who claims to be a 9/11 survivor.

As to her claims that no one is defending Pelosi:

Web Link

"Feinstein and other Democrats have begun to rally to Pelosi's defense against Republican charges that Pelosi should have spoken out against torture earlier if she knew about it herself. Feinstein said she wants to find out whether Bush administration officials gave full information to members of Congress who had a constitutional duty to oversee the administration."

also of interest is this quote from Sen Graham (a reublican):

""I don't know what Nancy Pelosi knew and when she knew it, and I really don't think she's a criminal that she was told about waterboarding and did nothing," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., at a Judiciary Committee panel on torture and the Bush Office of Legal Counsel. "We're talking about this now many years after 9/11. ... It's not really fair to sit here in the quiet and peace of the moment and put ourselves in a holier-than-thou position.""


Clearly Sharon has latched on to a new subject for her vile attacks, without regard to the truth or facts.

Interesting that Sharon would chose a magazine that is pro-Israel for her attempts to discredit a decorated military man, considering her previous statements, in other threads, against Israel and it's leaders.

Web Link

Makes me think that Sharon has no real feelings about anything, she just enjoys making outrageous comments and stirring the pot

"The Speaker in the US House of Representatives made the admission yesterday in an extraordinary press conference as she fought to maintain her credibility among the Democratic base.

Appearing tense and flustered on the podium as she rifled through her notes, Ms Pelosi is in the firing line after offering several versions of events in the past few weeks about CIA briefings on interrogation policies in 2002 and 2003.

Republicans have accused her of hypocrisy and the Democrat from San Francisco has tried to hit back.

She charged yesterday that the CIA was lying over what it was doing with detainees caught after 9/11.

But she admitted for the first time that she learnt the CIA was employing harsh interrogation techniques such as waterboarding - which simulates drowning - in February 2003. She said a staffer alerted her to the contents of CIA briefings to other top politicians.

She said the secrecy of the program prevented her from speaking out and denied that made her complicit in any detainee abuse.

The revelation is just one more of the bizarre explanations from Ms Pelosi over the CIA interrogation controversy.

She acknowledges she was directly briefed by the CIA five months before that February conversation.

But her account of the September 2002 meeting with CIA officials on the interrogation program differs markedly from that of the CIA and a Republican politician who was present. "Web Link



For more on Lieberman see Web Link

Boy, Sharon, we haven't seen that link about Lieberman in a long time. But you have no qualms in using Israel to attack Pelosi and her supporters--while in other threads you attack Israel and it's leaders.
So in all that you posted above where are there any facts to show that Pelosi lied to congress under oath, that she broke federal law and the criminal justice system will automatically engage?
While Pelosi may be guilty of hypocrisy (and of course, the republicans are not guilty of the same charge with regard to waterboarding and torture), Sharon, in her zeal to attack any democrat, is ignoring the main issue--did we engage in torture and was it authorized in the highest levels of government. Clearly the republicans and Sharon see this as a way to deflect the glare from them by harping on someone who had no say in the waterboardin/torture issue knew about it.

Gingrich also says that playing politics around anti-terror techniques could “get a lot of people killed.”

“This is really, really dangerous, and it is going to get a lot of people killed, if we don’t call a halt to it.”


Todays WSJ

" On the night of March 9, 1945, LeMay sent 346 huge B-29 bombers loaded with napalm from the Mariana Islands (Guam, Saipan and Tinian) to Tokyo. The first planes dropped their incendiaries on the front and back of the target area -- like lighting up both ends of a football field at night. The rest of the planes filled in the middle. More than 16 square miles of Japan's capital city were gutted, two million people were left homeless, and 100,000 were dead.Web Link

It didn't end there. Washington gave LeMay the green light as his bombers burned 64 more cities.
He used the World Almanac and just went down the list by population. Altogether, an estimated 350,000 people lost their lives."

Of course, we now know that FDR had accepted a false choice between our ideals and our security when he gave LeMay the go-ahead for the fire-bombing of Tokyo, but lives were saved -- American and Japanese. And "no American with a husband, brother or son serving in the military" questioned the methods.

"Gingrich also says that playing politics around anti-terror techniques could “get a lot of people killed.”"
well, isn't that what the faux outrage expressed by Sharon and the republicans really is--playing politics. And if Sharon and the republicans want to go after Pelosi they will first have to see Bush/Cheney/Rice/Rumsfeld,not to mention the lawyers and contractors/CIA agents that carried out the policy, held to account for the waterboarding/torture issue. After all, if you want Pelosi to pay the price for the waterboarding/torture issue, you will have to admit that it was against the law and then go after those that sanctioned it and practiced it.
And are we now comparing the events of WWII with the post-9/11 days? Are we saying that because LeMay did it, then it is okay to do again?
What are you trying to say, Sharon? What are your real feelings on the issue?

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Leon Panetta (the Democrat, Obama-appointed head of the CIA) says that the CIA briefed Pelosi truthfully. I.e., that Pelosi is lying. Web Link

Whatever your thoughts on Gingrich, Cheney, Bush and Curtis Lemay, if you are concerned about our country and its well-being, it has to be troubling that the Speaker of the House, who is third in line for the presidency, is lying and playing politics with this vital element of national security.

Susan--you state as fact that Panetta is telling the truth and Pelosi is lying. Do you have any facts to back this up?
You also state that this is a "vital element of national security"--but testimony the last few days from a number of people have disputed the claim that waterboarding/torture produced any useful information.
So who is really playing politics with this issue? Are the republicans saying that torture was wrong and Pelosi should have spoken up to stop it? Then she would have been attacked for "helping terrorists" and "endagering national security".
Seems to me that the republicans want it both ways--so who is playing politics?

"CIA Director Leon Panetta challenged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s accusations that the agency lied to her, writing a memo to his agents saying she received nothing but the truth.

Panetta said that "ultimately, it is up to Congress to evaluate all the evidence and reach its own conclusions about what happened."

Pelosi infuriated Republicans this week when she said in a press conference that she was "misled" by CIA officials during a briefing in 2002 about whether the U.S. was waterboarding alleged terrorist detainees.

Panetta, President Obama's pick to run the clandestine agency and President Clinton's former chief of staff, wrote in a memo to CIA employees Friday that "CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, describing 'the enhanced techniques that had been employed,'" according to CIA records.

"We are an agency of high integrity, professionalism and dedication," Panetta said in the memo.
"Our task is to tell it like it is — even if that’s not what people always want to hear.
Keep it up. Our national security depends on it."Web Link

I agree with Panetta:
"Panetta said that "ultimately, it is up to Congress to evaluate all the evidence and reach its own conclusions about what happened.""

I assume he is talking about the entire waterboarding/torture issue

The CIA had been lying to Congress and the nation all through the Bush regime years. Remember the infamous "It's a slam sunk" regarding the existence of WMD in Iraq? Far worse, the CIA tortured prisoners, killing numerous of them in the process, according to a number of sources, including Gen. Barry McCaffrey. One of the reasons the CIA was torturing prisoners was to fabricate a link between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda which would've "justified" the illegal invasion of Iraq. Nancy Pelosi betrayed her country, her constituency and the Constitution when she took impeachment off the table upon becoming Speaker, but she's a 100% correct when she says that the CIA has misled the Congress.

I think it's pretty clear. 0bama wants Pelosi out. Not only isn't he going to help her, he's going to push her.

She called the head of the CIA back in 2002 and the present head of the CIA liars.
They both are Democrats appointed by Democratic presidents. And there were other people present at those briefings.
She really is going to have to come up with a better defense than mentioning President Bush’s name as many times as possible.
But her main problem is that no matter how brilliant her new defense is, it’s going to be difficult to explain away her old statements. After all, she first said she never received a briefing and now she said she was personally lied to,
in the briefing she had already said she never received.

Evidence is mounting that under Cheney’s direction, "enhanced interrogation" was not used exclusively to prevent imminent acts of terror or collect actionable intelligence - the aims that he constantly emphasizes - but to invent evidence that would link al-Qaida with Saddam Hussein and connect the late Iraqi dictator to the 9/11 attacks.
 In one report after another, from journalists, former administration officials and Senate investigators, the same theme continues to emerge: Whenever a prisoner believed to possess any knowledge of al-Qaida’s operations or Iraqi intelligence came into American custody, CIA interrogators felt intense pressure from the Bush White House to produce evidence of an Iraq-Qaida relationship (which contradicted everything that U.S. intelligence and other experts knew about the enmity between Saddam’s Baath Party and Osama bin Laden’s jihadists). Indeed, the futile quest for proof of that connection is the common thread running through the gruesome stories of torture from the Guantánamo detainee camp to Egyptian prisons to the CIA's black sites in Thailand and elsewhere. Perhaps the sharpest rebuke to Cheney's assertions has come from Lawrence Wilkerson, the retired Army colonel and former senior State Department aide to Colin Powell, who says bluntly that when the administration first authorized "harsh interrogation" during the spring of 2002, "its principal priority for intelligence was not aimed at pre-empting another terrorist attack on the U.S. but discovering a smoking gun linking Iraq and al-Qaida."

"Susan--you state as fact that Panetta is telling the truth and Pelosi is lying...."

Ok, then have it your way: the Democrat, Obama-appointed head of the CIA is lying in attempt to discredit the Democrat Speaker of the House by lying about her knowledge of water-boarding.

Either way, a prominent Democrat is lying brazenly and one has to ask what kind of miscreants we have in charge of national security policy. Is this kind of dispute the country needs right now?

Perhaps Sharon will share with us her insider information regarding Obama and Pelosi. where does she come by this information.
As Paul points out the CIA has lied for years to Congress. Does the fact the the head of the CIA is a democrat prevent someone who is also a democrat from calling them a liar? That may be the rule for republicans. Also remember it is the current head of the CIA who is calling Pelosi a liar.
If we want to investigate the waterboarding/torture issue--then let us do it--focusing first on those that justified and carried it out and then those that supposedly knew about it.
Let's also take Sharon's pronouncements with regard to Obama and PElosi with a grain of salt. Sharon also claims to be a 9/11 survivor and is not above bashing Israel when it fits her post du jour and then using ISrael to support another of her posts. To quote Shakespeare--me thinks the lady dost protest too much

Susan:
"Either way, a prominent Democrat is lying brazenly and one has to ask what kind of miscreants we have in charge of national security policy. Is this kind of dispute the country needs right now?"

Also remember what PAnetta is basing his assertions on--CIA documents. Can these documents left behind before Panetta took office be considered reliable considering the CIAs past tendency to lie to Congress?

We also need to find out what kind of miscreants we had in charge of national security policy previously that led us to this point and tarnished our reputation as a just and good country.

It's just the Republicans indulging their favorite pursuit again - hitting girls. They never learn. They went after Janet Reno, Hillary Clinton, and Monica Lewinski, and lost all three fights. This time they're taking on Nancy Pelosi, the toughest street fighter of them all. When you have no ideas, start a fight, any fight.

On the other hand, let them break their lances again. While the Republicans fight with girls, Obama can work on the country's real problems.

"The reason why Nancy Pelosi and now Barack Obama are caught up in having to both simultaneously denounce coercive interrogation and yet continue it in whatever way they can hide it
— by rendition, denial, classification, legal parsing; by hearing things they didn’t hear and winking when there was a mote their eye —
is that there is often a choice “between our safety and ideals.” Cheney knows it and wants the documents declassified to show it.
The right approach would have been to make the choice.
In many cases the public should have chosen, through their officials, to have given up some degree of public safety to preserve the national ideals and paid the price that upholding morals has always exacted.
At other times, the public may have elected to do what it felt was necessary and taken the responsibility for it;
to be praised or condemned as posterity judged, just as Sherman, Truman, Curtis Le May, and Franklin Roosevelt are now weighed in the balance.

But they wanted to have it both ways.
Now both Pelosi and Obama are caught between the political necessity of preventing another 9/11 and losing their jobs or explaining what might have to be done and risk losing their jobs." Web Link

Whatever Bush, Cheney and the other Nazis in the last administration did or did not do, they're gone and thankfully have no power. And their actions do not excuse the mendacious activity now obviously going on among Democrats who now are in power.

Pelosi, Panetta, or both are engaged in a lying to the public. Pelosi obviously wants to find a way to provide cover for herself. I can think of no reason that Panetta would be lying to try to bring down Pelosi....Do you think he just doesn't like her or something.

I'm enjoying the gymnastics of Pelosi supporters twisting themselves in knots trying to explain and justify her actions. I thought the Bushies were bad, but this new bunch beats them in both the degree of dishonesty and the incompetence as I see it.

Interesting, "Sharon" claims that no one is supporting Pelosi. And "Susan" claims that "Pelosi supporters twisting themselves in knots trying to explain and justify her actions".
What are you referring to in this statement:
"mendacious activity now obviously going on among Democrats who now are in power", "Susan"

"What are you referring to in this statement..."

That should be clear: either Democrat Leon Panetta or Democrat Nancy Pelosi is lying: Pelosi says the CIA lied to her. Panetta said they told the truth. Both can't be right. Both can't be telling the truth.

The Democrat zombies on here want to talk about Bush, Cheney and the rest of those criminals in the last administration.... just like they've done for the 8 years before the Democrats came in.

And so the engage in all sorts of obfuscatory twisting and turning to try to avoid talking about the criminals in the current administration who are now in power and can do real harm to the country and to the American people unlike the hasbeens who were rightfully turned out of office in the last election.

If the shoe fits wear it RS.

Deleting my comments doesn't change a thing.
Real Californians have nothing but contempt for these women.

The support for Nancy is deafening coming from the others: Zoe, Anna Ellen Barbara and Diane.

Year of the Woman, where the support?

Ahha yes here is at least one reaction. Web Link

"That should be clear: either Democrat Leon Panetta or Democrat Nancy Pelosi is lying: Pelosi says the CIA lied to her. Panetta said they told the truth."
See my posting above where I asked where Panetta got his information from.

"The Democrat zombies on here want to talk about Bush, Cheney and the rest of those criminals in the last administration.... just like they've done for the 8 years before the Democrats came in."

Of course we must talk about Bush, Cheney etc. If what they did was okay, then there should be no issue with Pelosi or her statments.
So, "Susan", are you trying to sound like a democrat by calling Bush, Cheney etc criminals and then trying to sound republicanby calling us zombies? Did you also survive 9/11?


"And so the engage in all sorts of obfuscatory twisting and turning to try to avoid talking about the criminals in the current administration who are now in power"

Which criminals in the current administration are you referring to? if you are referring to Pelosi she has not committed any criminal acts

"can do real harm to the country and to the American people "
And how will this happen? What harm are you talking about?

You should stop getting your talking points from your alter ego, Sharon

The CIA activities are covered by the Convention on Torture, ratified by Ronald Reagan, for those who don't remember. Waterboarding is classified as torture under that convention, making it an automatic US law as well under Article VI of the Constitution. Does any sane person believe that anybody in the CIA, which was waterboarding on its own and sending detainees for "harsh interrogation" in "black sites" located in enlightened democracies such as Morocco and Egypt would tell the Congress the truth? They would be incriminating themselves and making the case for their future prosecutors. Of course the CIA lied to Congress and to Pelosi. Paneta is now CIA director and apparently feels he must protect his institution, but this entire episode is laughable. The shameful capitulation of the CIA to the Bush-Cheney junta makes anything it claims entirely unbelievable.

"It's just the Republicans indulging their favorite pursuit again - hitting girls. They never learn. They went after Janet Reno, Hillary Clinton, and Monica Lewinski, and lost all three fights."
Reno was correctly attacked for Waco and Elian Gonzales, Hillary was appropriately attacked for improper fund raising but Lewinsky was not attacked by anyone but Bill. The party making a full court press against Palin and Dr. Rice is ill behooven to attack republicans for misogyny.

"So, "Susan", are you trying to sound like a democrat by calling Bush, Cheney etc criminals and then trying to sound republicanby calling us zombies?"

Apparently it never occurs to the most partisan extremists that it's possible to be critical of one party without being a supporter of the other party. It was this "you're either for us or against us" attitude of the last administration that got us into so much trouble and contributed to the poisonous atmosphere we see replicated in miniature in this thread.

If you don't think brazen open lies about national security by the person third in line for the presidency aren't harmful to the country - presumably because she is a Democrat and because besides Bush harmed the country by lying too - then your are beyond the reach of logic or rational argumentation.

Best to let such people stew in their own irrational obsessive hatred and bile.

"If you don't think brazen open lies about national security by the person third in line for the presidency aren't harmful to the country -"

What brazen open lies are you referring to?
Previously you stated--"That should be clear: either Democrat Leon Panetta or Democrat Nancy Pelosi is lying:". Now you claim that it is Pelosi who is lying? Proof, please. How quickly you change your tune.
Let us say that Pelosi is lying about the waterboarding briefings, how is that harmful to the country?

Your hysterical postings, without a shred of actual proof, are sounding more and more like Sharon. Are you her acolyte?

It should not be surprising, though it is shameful, that Walter defends the murder of government agents at Waco by a pedophile and his followers and then attacks the AG for taking decisive action to bring an end to the siege. Reno also gotthe Elian Gonzales affair right as well.

"Reno was correctly attacked for Waco and Elian Gonzales, Hillary was appropriately attacked for improper fund raising but Lewinsky was not attacked by anyone but Bill. "

Beg to differ, Walter. the House Repubs had a wonderful time drooling over the Monica-Bill details and creating the porniest report ever made available to grade school kids by a government. But they not only lost the impeachment, it totally backfired on them as Gingrich and Livingston will remind you. Might even explain Bush's election loss in 2000, which a partisan Supreme Court had to undo in a hurry.

Yes, Reno and Hillary also faced silly partisan attacks. Both emerged unscathed and stronger than before.

There's nothing more laughable than wannabe bullies who can't beat up anybody but themselves.

"Let us say that Pelosi is lying about the waterboarding briefings, how is that harmful to the country?"

She is Speaker of the House, and third in line to the presidency. If she is a blatant liar, just to cover her political butt, she should be sent packing.

"If she is a blatant liar, just to cover her political butt, she should be sent packing."

That's what Republicans said about Clinton, but when the dust settled they were the ones packing. Remember the classic definition of idiocy: doing the same thing over and over, expecting different outcomes? Well, go for it, Repubs.

There is one constant that ran throughout the Bush-Cheney regime: Lies. I would be hard-pressed to cite one unambiguously true statement made by any official of the Bush regime at any point during its disastrous eight-year run. Why were they compelled to lie about literally everything? It seems to be a demonstration of their "consciousness of guilt." The evil criminals seem to have been deliberately out to do as much damage to the United States of America as possible - politically, diplomatically, economically and morally.
Mission accomplished.
I wouldn't put anything past sociopathic monsters like these - including staging 9/11 for their own political advantage. That Cheney has planted "left-behinds" in the government and military should be justification for his own immediate "enhanced interrogation" for our national security.
Since Cheney has advocated such interrogations in extreme circumstances, I'm sure he'd understand.

"Panetta's note was sent to reporters via the CIA press office. Here's the key graph:

"Let me be clear: It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress. That is against our laws and our values. As the Agency indicated previously in response to Congressional inquiries, our contemporaneous records from September 2002 indicate that CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, describing “the enhanced techniques that had been employed.” Ultimately, it is up to Congress to evaluate all the evidence and reach its own conclusions about what happened.""

Web Link


Leon Panetta is a Democrat.

"Let me be clear: It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress. That is against our laws and our values." It must have been in that spirit that former CIA Director George Tenent told Bush and Congress that the evidence for WMD's in Iraq were a "slam dunk" and then set proudly behind Colin Powel while the scretary of state was lying, fabricating and conning the entire world in his infamous 2002 speech at the U.N. Actually, we ought to be shocked if the CIA had told the Congress the truth even ONCE during the catastrophic Bush/Cheney years, and I wouldn't believe now one word that comes out of the CIA about those years, regardless of whether the current director is a Democrat or Republican.

Anybody who believes that the CIA didn't lie to Congress about torture should call me immediately. I have some very inexpensive Downtown Manhattan real estate to sell them.

San Fran Nan has just rolled over and begged forgiveness from the CIA and Congress.
""We all share great respect for the dedicated men and women of the intelligence community who are deeply committed to the safety and security of the American people.... blah blah, please forgive me, I will do any thing,can I lick your boots? thank you master etc etc---

Too little to late, may play well with the SF BDSM crowd, elsewhere? nada---
Obama will announce the SCOUS on monday to change the topic but he is glad to be rid of Pelosi,
she served her purpose, now she is a paper towel.
Politicians always break your heart I guess, but she did not even get dinner, a movie nor a follow up phone call, the cad.



Seems to me a pretty clear attempt on Pelosis part to walk back yesterday's fresh new story that she had been lied to.
She doesn't want the documents coming out that prove her to be a liar, so she's attempting a "Let's just call it a draw" withdrawal of the claim.
Good luck with that!!

But she said yesterday, clearly:

Q: Madame Speaker, just to be clear, you are accusing the CIA of lying to you in September 2002?

A: Yes, of misleading the Congress of the United States. Misleading the Congress of the United States.

And now, now that the CIA is calling her a liar and further damaging her dwindling authority, she decides she really meant it was the Bush Administration, and not the CIA at all.

Unbelievable.

Nancy Pelosi is not the issue. Who authorized the torture of prisoners in American custody is the issue. Who authorized it and who carried it out. THAT is the issue. Torture is against the law. The Bush Administration authorized it. They should all be investigated and, if found to be responsible, prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Republicans with the aid of the Corporate Media are just trying to change the focus.

The issue for most people is-- did Pelosi LIE to Congress or did she tell the truth, this ain't a he said she said issue. Someone lied to Congress, this is a big deal and Obama has thrown Pelosi under the bus.

Dianne F, and Barbara B have shunned her, now she is another sub in the Mission district, the pain the humiliation.

SCOTUS announcement on Monday for sure, move on nothing to see here, dream on---

Give Pelosi a break. She is not too swift, and probably thought they were talking about surfing.

Actually, a truth commission is a good idea, it will reveal how one interrogation saved 10,000+ lives in LA.

We are not dealing with PETA here, apparently AQ has plans to attack major US Universities, a dirty bomb @ Stanford will leave this area uninhabitable for a generation.
Think about it.
A truck bomb, with easily available radioactive material and explosives, will make Stanford/Palo Alto uninhabitable for years and cause many terrible cancers short and long term.
In NYC they monitor every truck entering the city for radiation, they even pick up thyroid cancer patients who have had radiation therapy. Do you think we do this level of monitoring here?

If gangs can smuggle tons of drugs across our borders they can smuggle dirty bombs.
AQ can even assemble dirty bombs from medical and other waste from within the US.

Curtis Le May killed 100,000 Japanese in Tokyo in one night, FDR and we had no problem.
The CIA tickled a couple of throats and prevented the death of 10,000 in LA.

We could evaporate Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran etc and kill millions, or we can proactively protect our people.

Which is the lesser evil?

Dirty bombs are not as big a threat than you might think. The idea behind a dirty bomb is that they are fear provokers but the effect is minimal when you consider actual damage. They tend to be small so the explosion would not affect a large area. They do have nuclear capabilities but weaponized nuclear materials are not easy to come by, especially in some cave in Afghanistan or Pakistan. When these nuclear materials are detonated then the winds will most likely disperse and dilute the material to the point where they become non-lethal. So radiation would not be a big concern as one might think. While there would still be poisoning there would not be drastic consequences. These are not nuclear bombs that our military has these are small home-made devices that do not have the capabilities of large area destruction. Like I said dirty-bombs are not as affective as our media plays them out to be.

A dirty bomb @ Stanford will do this

"Since a terrorist dirty bomb is unlikely to cause many deaths, many do not consider this to be a weapon of mass destruction.[3]
Its purpose would presumably be to create psychological, not physical, harm through ignorance, mass panic, and terror.
For this reason dirty bombs are sometimes called "weapons of mass disruption".
Additionally, containment and decontamination of thousands of victims, as well as decontamination of the affected area might require considerable time and expense, rendering areas partly unusable and causing economic damage......Loss of working hours will be vast during cleanup, but even after the radiation levels reduce to an acceptable level, there might be residual public fear of the site including possible unwillingness to conduct business as usual in the area.
Tourist traffic is likely never to resume.[11]"Web Link

Essentially that means the end of real estate in PA, the end of investment and the end of Stanford as a world class university.

Think Detroit, as a liberal who was mugged I do not want to be a recovering liberal who is irradiated, may be you are comfortable with that.
The vast majority of Palo Altoans when faced with that reality will vote with their kids, their pockets and their feet.

A left over from the cold war with the USSR is the understanding by both sides that if rouge elements in either military mount an attack on the other, the country as a whole will be held accountable.

That mutual understanding continues to this day with modern Russia.

Why isn't the west, indeed, humanity in general holding Islam to that same standard with it's rouge elements?

Regarding a dirty bomb, it's just a matter of time, but I doubt the first one will happen in the USA or in Europe. Thailand or the Philippines are much easier targets, and targets that are currently under assault from Islamic terrorists, and most importantly considered "backwaters" by the west.

What will be the response from civilized humanity when this happens?

What will be the response from the USA?

The actions taken in response to an inevitable dirty bomb attack will determine the future of humanity.

rogue?

POV,

Yes, rogue, thanks for the correction, spellcheck didn't catch it

Web Link

Boy, Sharon was on a real role last night:

"Too little to late, may play well with the SF BDSM crowd, elsewhere? nada---"
Doesn't have to--her constituents are in SF. And what is with the vile comment about the "BDSM crowd"? Are you homophobic as well, Sharon or is it just you lobbing another one of your written bombs?

"she served her purpose, now she is a paper towel."
CAre to make a bet on that, Sharon?

"A: Yes, of misleading the Congress of the United States. Misleading the Congress of the United States."
You actually believe that the CIA has been honest with Congress. We have Bob Graham's evidence that he was only briefed once by the CIA while they claim he was briefed 4 times.

"Dianne F, and Barbara B have shunned her, now she is another sub in the Mission district, the pain the humiliation."
My, my, Sharon aren;t we beingthe drama queen here. You have not read the papers--the democrats are rallying around her, especially now that Gingrich has attacked Pelosi in a most heinous manner.

"The CIA tickled a couple of throats and prevented the death of 10,000 in LA."
Do you know this for a fact? That is your problem with you Sharon, the facts have no place in your hysterical postings.


"Tourist traffic is likely never to resume.[11]"Web Link"
A wikipedia link for "dirty bombs"??? Really can we get something a little more factual. Oh, never mind, I forgot about you and the facts.


The real issue is the torture/waterboarding. Pelosi and others were briefed well after the program was initiated. Were these briefings done with the condition that they be kept secret? if so, what could PElosi and other's have done? Had Pelosi decried the technique she would have been labeled a traitor bythe republicans.
The republicans and the Sharons of the world are trying a smoke screen to avoid the real issue. Yes, by all means, lets have a truth commission and get to the whole truth. Can Sharon take it? I doubt it.

A truth commission will review the memos on the results of the interrogations and reveal that they prevented a major attack on LA as well as others.


For example
"In 2006, Dhiren Barot from North London pleaded guilty of conspiring to murder innocent people within the United Kingdom and United States using a radioactive dirty bomb.
He planned to target underground car parks within the UK and buildings in the U.S. such as the International Monetary Fund, World Bank buildings in Washington D.C., the New York Stock Exchange, Citigroup buildings and the Prudential Financial buildings in Newark, New Jersey."

AQ members are prepared to go on suicide missions that involve planes, bombs, dirty bombs, biological and chemical agents.

The truth commission will show how many of such attacks have been prevented.

Yes, by all means, let's have a truth commission.
We have already heard testimony this week that waterboarding/torture does not work. Let's get to the real facts--not the "facts" that Sharon writes about. Where does she come up with this "they prevented a major attack on LA "? Does she have access to documents that we have not seen or is it a product of her active imagination--after all she also claims to be a 9/11 survivor.
I doubt Sharon really wants a truth commission and Cheney and his minions certainly do not want one either. Then they would have to provide actual proof for all their claims.

Cheney asked that the memos I mention be released.

The prove American lives were saved.

His request was denied because the matter is in litigation probably by the ACLU.

Panetta was installed at the CIA to ensure that the agency would not start generating leaks to the press designed to damage Obama the way it did with GWB.

That’s a difficult task already, and he could never expect to succeed at it were he and Obama to allow the CIA to become Nancy Pelosi’s pinata.
So now he has to push back.

Many people in the CIA must by now know a lot of gritty details about how Obama has adopted one GWB policy after another behind a thin verbal veneer of ‘Change’. That plus their demonstrated ability to leak to the press and get away with it adds up to a pretty effective threat.

For Example Barack Obama U-turn over military terror trialsWeb Link
Jonathan Hafetz, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, said: 'It's disappointing that Obama is seeking to revive rather than end this failed experiment.'

The Unlikely Conspiracy to Get Nancy Web Link">Web Link


Pelosi declined invitations to all the Sunday talk shows and refused to send a representative.

And why should she she has made herself perfectly clear, I repeat, perfectly clear.

As Pelosi pointed out at Thursday’s press conference—during which she exhibited her trademark unflappable demeanor and grasp of the facts—Republicans are exploiting the emergence of this manufactured scandal to distract the public from the real culprits: Themselves.
“This is a diversionary tactic to take the spotlight off the people who conceived, developed, and implemented these policies, which all of us long opposed,”
the Speaker explained, her face taut with what some observers described as righteous indignation.

Pelosi has been absolutely clear about what happened during that Sept 2002 meeting, and it’s offensive that anyone would go out of his way to contradict her April 23, 2009 recollection:
“At that, or any other briefing, we were not—I repeat—were not told that waterboarding or any of these other Enhanced Interrogation Methods were used.” Web Link">Web Link

"Cheney asked that the memos I mention be released.
The prove American lives were saved."

Really, Sharon?? Have you seen the memos?

"Many people in the CIA must by now know a lot of gritty details about how Obama has adopted one GWB policy after another behind a thin verbal veneer of ‘Change’. That plus their demonstrated ability to leak to the press and get away with it adds up to a pretty effective threat.

For Example Barack Obama U-turn over military terror trialsWeb Link"

I would think that you would be happy about this Sharon. After all you supported Bush's policies, so I assume you support Obama continuing them. Or do you not stand for anything and just like to make outrageous comments?

"“This is a diversionary tactic to take the spotlight off the people who conceived, developed, and implemented these policies, which all of us long opposed,”"

Pelosi is correct. These briefings were secret briefings were they not? What could Pelosi have said or done. Had she said or done anything she would of been accused of treason.
Sharon wants it both ways. She supports torture. SHe expects those that got secret briefings about it to be quite, but then she attacks Pelosi because she did not speak out.
SHaron latches on to certain policians and then uses this forum to vilify them--Obama and Lieberman have been in her sites before.

Obama has very different views from Lieberman as you will see this week as Obama implements his Holy Land agenda.

Also Obama has never been a member a terrorist organization, Lieberman was a member of Kach, which Israel denounced as a racist, terrorist organization and outlawed.

Obama is wise to continue the Bush/Cheney policies that continue protect our nation.
And I wish him luck as he continues those policies in the face of yelping from the ACLU etc.

Pelosi is 2 heartbeats away from the POTUS, she has lost all credibility for this role after her performance last week.
That is why she has gone to ground this weekend and hopes that the coming announcement of picks for SCOTUS will distract the voters.
I am afraid it is too little too late for that.

"Also Obama has never been a member a terrorist organization, Lieberman was a member of Kach, which Israel denounced as a racist, terrorist organization and outlawed."

Bringing this up again, Sharon? I though we disproved that in other charges (the claims against Lieberman were brought forward by disgruntled members of Kach and were never proven to be facts. The person who makes the claims says that that when Lieberman first immigrated into Israel, he joined the movement. Lieberman emigrated to Israel in 1978. The claim is that Lieberman was active in the movement for several months. The Kach movement participated in the 1984 elections in Israel and won one seat;in 1988 the movement was barred from participating in the elections for its racist ideology and was officially declared a terrorist movement in 1994. So if Lieberman was a member--he was a member of a legititimate (at the time) political party. Sharon has no need for the facts so she continues to run with that old football.).
Her vile attacks on Lieberman continue. As I stated, once Sharon latches on to someone, her stories, fairy tales and other falsehoods continue unabated.
Anyway, Sharon, Leiberman is FM--get used to it.

"That is why she has gone to ground this weekend and hopes that the coming announcement of picks for SCOTUS will distract the voters.
I am afraid it is too little too late for that."

She has also now latched on to Pelosi. Pelosi will weather this storm. It is a distraction by Sharon and her ilk to try to divert attention from the real issue of torture/waterboarding. This will pass.

There you go again RS.

Sharon has, in fact, made some very good points. Pelosi is 3rd in line for POTUS. In these dangerous times, that is a dangerous state as she lost all credibility with her rather bizarre attack on the CIA, " what's the frequency Kevin".
Credibility and trust takes years to build, both can be demolished in a few minutes, which is what Pelosi did with her wierd rant.
I am afraid there is no way back.
I am sure some very partisan Repubs would be happy to have such a clown as speaker.
But the rest of us have to put the countys interest first, she must go,----- quietly and quickly
I am not at all happy with the prospect of " foot in your mouth" Biden as standin for POTUS, but Pelosi would be a laughingstock and disaster.
I too look forward to seeing the evidence that 1000s of American lives that have been saved by Bushs policies re terrorists.
There is clear evidence that Paddilla was planning to detonate a dirty bomb in LA, he is just the tip of the iceberg.
For anyone who has sensitivities about interrogation techniques--consider this-----
Your young child has been kidnapped and is in a chamber underground with limited air supply, enough for a few hour.
You have the kidnapper in custody, he has the information on the location of your precious child.

What would you do, let your child die a horrible terrifying death and then prosecute if you could.
Or would you do what it took to find the location of your child and save her life?
There is the choice

"But the rest of us have to put the countys interest first, she must go,----- quietly and quickly"

Not going to happen, Jacob.

"I too look forward to seeing the evidence that 1000s of American lives that have been saved by Bushs policies re terrorists."
Yes, let's hear the facts and not the scare tactics.

"There is clear evidence that Paddilla was planning to detonate a dirty bomb in LA, he is just the tip of the iceberg."
But if you want to bringup Padilla. He was revealed by non-troture tactics as testified to this past week:

Web Link
"Soufan: CIA torture actually hindered our intelligence gathering"
As Soufan and his team resumed their interrogation, Zubaydah revealed information about Jose Padilla, the alleged "dirty bomber."
But after that, the CIA and the contractor again took over, using what Soufan called an "untested theory" that the Cold War techniques might work for getting good information. "Again, however, the technique wasn't working," Soufan recalled.

"Your young child has been kidnapped and is in a chamber underground with limited air supply, enough for a few hour.
You have the kidnapper in custody, he has the information on the location of your precious child.
What would you do, let your child die a horrible terrifying death and then prosecute if you could.
Or would you do what it took to find the location of your child and save her life?"

Yes, this is the fantasy scenario that Bush and the Sharons like to bring up.
However the big difference is that you are talking about a certain scenario vs a scenario that never occurred. The administration was in a panic and outthe widnow went our ideals and ethics

"outthe widnow went our ideals and ethics"( sic )quote from RS above

Pelosi did not accuse the CIA or even Bush of defenestrating anyone, I thought that was a European thing.
Either Pelosi or the head of the CIA has to go, Obama has already made his decision, guess who has been subautobussed.
Pelosi has not, I repeat, not been botoxed to a rictus faced HarpyWeb Link tape loop I repeat, I repeat, I repeat......

Sharon continues her vile attacks on Pelosi, this time comparing her to a harpy.
Sharon ignores the fact and makes up her own (like being a 9/11 survivor). Neither Pelosi nor Panetta will go, much to Sharon's disappointment.
Sharon and the republicans are putting out a smokescreen to divert attention from the torture/Watreboarding issue. The CIA lied about Sen Graham's briefings and baked down when confronted with the facts.
SHaron whines about Pelosi, but any briefings Pelosi received were top secret--she could not have said anything even if she were briefed about torture. And of course had she been able to, she would have been vilified as a traitor.
Please, Sharon, spare us any more of your hysterical postings. Why don;t you just tell us how you slid down the rubble of the tower as it was collapsing on 9/11

Democrats never have to leave, under any circumstances, no matter what they say or what they do. Even if they have ACTUAL sex with an underage person, or are caught on tape taking ACTUAL money for bribes, or publicly lie outright so that anyone at all can see the bold-faced lie in broad daylight, they just get re-elected with media complicity and winking, like Frank or Jefferson...unlike Republicans, who throw themselves on the sword at the merest whisper of innuendo, which they know is only going to be fanned into flames of public trials and conviction, and who want to simply avoid the haranging and get out ...( I know that all the Repubs from the last 10 years who are going to be named from posters after this paragraph are going to prove my point, but the poster is going to THINK it proves theirs..you wait)

So, no, Pelosi will not leave. And she will never get voted out. We are stuck with her. Now Specter is defending her and going after the CIA, believing this will endear him to the media and his fellow Dems.. Too bad... Oh well

Perspective--wasn't Jefferson defeated for re-election last year. And isn't Larry Craig still a senator. Wasn;t Gary Condit defeated for re-election years ago after the Chandra Levy scandal? Never mind, do not let facts get in your way.

Forget the facts about Barney Frank also:

Web Link
"After an investigation, the Ethics Committee found no evidence that Frank had known of or been involved in the alleged illegal activity and dismissed all of Gobie's more scandalous claims.[18][19]"

Regarding get re-elected or not--isn't it up to the person's constituents to decide to return them to office or not?? Or are you also unhappy with that portion of our democratic process, since you previously stated a dislike for the Supreme Court making decisions as well. You really hate America and what it stands for, don't you, Perspective. It is not just Obama, you hate our democracy and way of life.

I wonder who told Pelosi to shut up?

Pelosi Declines Further Comment on CIA AllegationsWeb Link

Probably no one, Shraon, why waste time on Republican and Sharon games when there are more important issues to deal with.
Interesting that one of the republicans leading the charge against Pelosi, Hoekstra also accused the CIA of lying a little while back. But that was okay I guess. So if Hoekstra believed that the CIA lied then, why can't they be lying now.
Gingrich calling for Peolosi to resign is hysterical--we have an ethically challenged, adulterer preaching about what Pelosi should do.
Let's get to all the facts about torture/waterboarding. Interesting that the republicans are now saying that Pelosi knew about torture. Had she said anything at the time, they and Sharon would have led the charge to label her a traitor. What hypocrisy!!!

"Traitor" is an appropriate word.
Here's a good definition of a traitor (and very eerily descriptive of the crew running the country today).

"A nation can survive its fools, & even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.
An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known & carries his banner openly.
But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.
For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, & he wears their face & their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men.
He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly & unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist.
A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague."...Marcus Tullius Cicero

My, my , Sharon aren't we getting vicious now. Who in our current government are you calling a traitor? Who in our current government is guilty of treason? Do you actually have any proof or is this more of your inflammatory and hysterical postings?
Of course one has to remember the source, a person who claimed to be jewish in order to cover her vile attacks against members of the Israeli government. A person who claimed to be a 9/11 survivor in order to justify her hysterical postings against the current government.
I think that this may be your vilest attack yet--claiming that members of our current government are guilty of treason.
Have you no shame, Sharon?

The Real Sharon,

"we have an ethically challenged, adulterer preaching about what Pelosi should do."

Really? What did Bill Clinton have to say about her?

What happened here was very simple.
The Democrats and their pet scoundrels had been hurling accusations of lying at the Republicans for years now and not only got away with it but had Scooter Libby convicted for no good reason and got control of the Congress and the Presidency as well.
One more little accusation would get Pelosi out of a little jam, and couldn’t hurt could it?

Problem was now, the CIA is part of the Executive Branch – THEIR Executive Branch and is headed by noneother than Pelosi’s good pal and fellow California flake, Panetta.

And regardless of what you think about the attitudes and capabilities of the CIA,
I can tell you from personal experience that if they can do nothing else, intelligence agencies keep damn good records and know how to grab the files fast.

It is amusing to see that the Republicans have seized on the “Investigation” idea.
Of course, they say they want to investigate the CIA to see if they lied.
And they known darn well what the investigation will show.

Sharon, great quote..gives me the creeps.


I still have some hope that the nation's eyes will lose their veils, and the cries of "He's right, she's right, the Emperor has no clothes!" will grow throughout the nation.

Time will tell. If nothing else, eventually even the most die-hard will realize that at some point it is no longer "Bush's and the Repub's fault" when not only did both security and the economy worsen under Obama/Dems, but didn't improve. Even the most uninformed will figure out eventually that something is wrong.

We woke up from Carter, and I still have some hope, though our population is less educated, that we will wake up from Obama.

"I can tell you from personal experience that if they can do nothing else, intelligence agencies keep damn good records and know how to grab the files fast."

Really, Sharon, what personal experience? Where you also in the CIA or another intelligence agency? was this before or after you were jewish or before or after you survived 9/11?

I see Pelosi Galore is actively fighting for human rights ( Tibet) and against torture in China---NOT

Just as she did in 2002-3-4-5-6-7 etc

Actually she is hiding out from the US Press after her chaotic performance re the CIA

Sharon--I am sure that Pelosi is extremely concerned about what you think and your opinion of her. I am sure she follows your posts about her avidly.
At least Pelosi is serving her country. What do you do for the people?
And since when did you care about human rights, Ms 9/11 survivor?